MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294335631 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000201262

Opinion & Special Article: Glioma Classification

2022· article· en· W4294335631 on OpenAlexaff
Matthijs van der Meulen, Ronald Ramos, Warren Mason, Andreas von Deimling, Sybren L. N. Maas

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGliomaGrading (engineering)Isocitrate dehydrogenaseMedicineIDH1AstrocytomaNeurologyPathologyBrain tumorGlioblastomaOncologyBioinformaticsCancer researchBiologyGenePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diffuse infiltrating gliomas are the most common malignant brain tumors in adults. The 2021 World Health Organization classification for CNS tumors (CNS5 WHO) has significantly altered the rules for classification and grading of diffuse gliomas. Clinicians, including neurology residents and neurologists, will have to consider the changes that include the introduction of new tumor types, allotting established tumor types to other groups and substituting previously essential morphological features for additional molecular markers. For example, in the current classification, glioblastoma is defined as isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wildtype, grade 4. Whereas, a grade 4 IDH-mutated astrocytic glioma is referred to as astrocytoma, IDH-mutated, grade 4. In addition, potential targeted treatments, based on the underlying molecular alterations, have become therapeutic options for diffuse gliomas. For clinicians, it is important to know the rationale for why these options are only available for specific tumors. Owing to the emphasis of molecular markers in the CNS5 WHO classification, interpretation of a pathology report and understanding of its clinical implications can be challenging. This review describes the most important molecular alterations in glioma, summarizes the recent changes in the CNS5 WHO classification for glioma, and presents a stepwise approach for trainees and neurologists to decipher a glioma pathology report. Additional information is summarized in eTable 1 (links.lww.com/WNL/C324).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.037

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207